He would if the choice was between that, a dozen other jobs exactly like that, or starving to death. We know this because it has actually happened, unlike your fairytale capitalism that could never exist. But hey, at least he had a choice! That's freedom, baby! I can choose to die in the coal mines or the salt mines!

He would if the choice was between that, a dozen other jobs exactly like that, or starving to death. We know this because it has actually happened, unlike your fairytale capitalism that could never exist. But hey, at least he had a choice! That's freedom, baby! I can choose to die in the coal mines or the salt mines!

It's irrational to assume this would happen in a free society. Obviously nobody likes working in such places. The only people who would are those with no valuable skills. Of course, after working, in say, a salt mine for a year or two one would then gain the skills to move up: the individual gained value and is thus more desirable. Anybody could desire him whether it be an individual with capital or a company. Obviously not everybody would start at the bottom rung of the latter.

I honestly don't see anything wrong with starting out with a crappy job and working your way up. That's what most factory workers do in India: they work for a period or two then save up to start their own business. To me that is freedom.

Oh look, another example of capitalism working out wonderfully in theory even though it repeatedly fails in the real world. Why don't you ask some of those early 20th century American coal miners how easy it was for them to work their way up to management or save up enough to start a business and listen to them laugh their asses off (well, I mean, if they hadn't died of black lung 70 years ago).

I notice, too, that the DUI thing continues to go unanswered, so I'll just assume that you're the type of person who likes to ignore his own blatantly contradictory beliefs rather than try to confront them and figure out why they conflict. A hardline, uncompromising ideology is always more important than logic and common sense, right?

Oh look, another example of capitalism working out wonderfully in theory even though it repeatedly fails in the real world. Why don't you ask some of those early 20th century American coal miners how easy it was for them to work their way up to management or save up enough to start a business and listen to them laugh their asses off (well, I mean, if they hadn't died of black lung 70 years ago).

I notice, too, that the DUI thing continues to go unanswered, so I'll just assume that you're the type of person who likes to ignore his own blatantly contradictory beliefs rather than try to confront them and figure out why they conflict. A hardline, uncompromising ideology is always more important than logic and common sense, right?

Oh oh oh look at all this capitalism. Yum, can someone pass the permits with a side of going to jail for selling lemonade? Also, tax and restrictions for desert please.

Play Bitcoin Poker at sealswithclubs.eu. We're active and open to everyone.

My apologies. Since we don't have the One True Capitalism yet, every instance of profit-seeking businesses acting unethically in the pursuit of profit is obviously the government's fault because _________. And getting rid of laws that prevent businesses from killing their workers and customers would actually make them more ethical. Got it. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

Save your annual Little Girl Gets Fined For Running a Lemonade Stand news story for the cheesy human interest story section of the paper, please.

Children should be given equal opportunities in life regardless of their parents' decisions. Though the mother is clearly an idiot for saying that "someone should be held accountable" (you mean yourself? idiot), the children should not have to suffer for her lack of responsibility. If nobody is willing to support them voluntarily, then I must argue that this is one of the few cases where the coercion of the state is necessary and justified, not to guarantee equality of outcome, but to guarantee equality of opportunity for these kids.However, the mother should not get a single cent for her irresponsible actions.

Somebody has to care for them to want to enslave people to have these children cared for. Otherwise, they would be left to die. The fact that it's an issue shows they will be cared for. It's only a matter of expressing that compassion morally without tyranny. In the end, if violence has to occur, it's only due to laziness from the people who send the brutes to get the children cared for. It's uncalled for. If you "care" so much about the children, go care for them yourself but don't force anybody else to do it.

In the end, it's just a desire: you want the children cared for. You may also want your lawn mowed and a steak; that doesn't justify violence to achieve these ends.

I'd have to agree with ALPHA on this one. Why is it right to force other people to work so that more people can live?

And if we are forcing other people to work so that more people can live, where do we draw the line on life or death? If it costs $10 to keep a person alive, do we force people to do it? What about $10,000? What about for $10,000,000? At some point, we will have enslaved ourselves entirely to the diminishing returns of saving people's lives. But shouldn't saving lives be optional in the first place? And if not, who decides who lives and who dies? It's a scary place to be when the government is dictating those choices for us.

I'd have to agree with ALPHA on this one. Why is it right to force other people to work so that more people can live?

And if we are forcing other people to work so that more people can live, where do we draw the line on life or death? If it costs $10 to keep a person alive, do we force people to do it? What about $10,000? What about for $10,000,000? At some point, we will have enslaved ourselves entirely to the diminishing returns of saving people's lives. But shouldn't saving lives be optional in the first place? And if not, who decides who lives and who dies? It's a scary place to be when the government is dictating those choices for us.

These questions require some effort and cost/benefit analysis, which is hard. Therefore, we should just let them all die.

In libertarian crazy world, the only thing worse than a government taking lives is a government saving lives.

I'd have to agree with ALPHA on this one. Why is it right to force other people to work so that more people can live?

And if we are forcing other people to work so that more people can live, where do we draw the line on life or death? If it costs $10 to keep a person alive, do we force people to do it? What about $10,000? What about for $10,000,000? At some point, we will have enslaved ourselves entirely to the diminishing returns of saving people's lives. But shouldn't saving lives be optional in the first place? And if not, who decides who lives and who dies? It's a scary place to be when the government is dictating those choices for us.

These questions require some effort and cost/benefit analysis, which is hard. Therefore, we should just let them all die.

In libertarian crazy world, the only thing worse than a government taking lives is a government saving lives.

I'm open to suggestions. I don't think it should be up to a government panel though. I think it should be up to individuals what lives they want to save.

Somebody has to care for them to want to enslave people to have these children cared for. Otherwise, they would be left to die. The fact that it's an issue shows they will be cared for. It's only a matter of expressing that compassion morally without tyranny. In the end, if violence has to occur, it's only due to laziness from the people who send the brutes to get the children cared for.

There are an estimated 30 million real, actual, no-foolin' slaves left in the world. By claiming that a billionaire who pays 15% tax on his capital gains is in the same league with them, and spending 99% of your time complaining about his "plight" while ignoring the real slaves, you pretty much make yourself out to be a disgusting piece of shit.

Your arrangement is just about percents? So, at what point does one become a slave? 50%, 75%, 95%, 99.999999999% ? what then?

"The only security men can have for their political liberty, consists in keeping their money in their own pockets".Lysander Spooner

Somebody has to care for them to want to enslave people to have these children cared for. Otherwise, they would be left to die. The fact that it's an issue shows they will be cared for. It's only a matter of expressing that compassion morally without tyranny. In the end, if violence has to occur, it's only due to laziness from the people who send the brutes to get the children cared for.

There are an estimated 30 million real, actual, no-foolin' slaves left in the world. By claiming that a billionaire who pays 15% tax on his capital gains is in the same league with them, and spending 99% of your time complaining about his "plight" while ignoring the real slaves, you pretty much make yourself out to be a disgusting piece of shit.

Your arrangement is just about percents? So, at what point does one become a slave? 50%, 75%, 95%, 99.999999999% ? what then?

You missed the point. There are real slaves. There are people who pay income tax. Its sad to see people pretending they are slaves because they pay income tax.

Children cannot be held responsible for parents choice. Not their fault their parents are idiot.

People cannot be held responsible for other people's choices. It's not their fault this mother chose to have 15 children. I am all for people voluntarily helping this mother's children but the idea other people must be HELD ACCOUNTABLE for HER CHOICES is disturbing.

But the children are more valuable than you.

They have a higher potential than you, they can become important scientists or what else, so it's in the interest of the nation to help them.

Children cannot be held responsible for parents choice. Not their fault their parents are idiot.

People cannot be held responsible for other people's choices. It's not their fault this mother chose to have 15 children. I am all for people voluntarily helping this mother's children but the idea other people must be HELD ACCOUNTABLE for HER CHOICES is disturbing.

But the children are more valuable than you.

They have a higher potential than you, they can become important scientists or what else, so it's in the interest of the nation to help them.

No, you value the children more than me. It's not in the interest of the nation to help them. A nation does not think, feel... It is not a sentient organism -- you are. It is in YOUR interest to help them and YOU want to steal for me to meet YOUR DESIRE: to help the children.

Children cannot be held responsible for parents choice. Not their fault their parents are idiot.

People cannot be held responsible for other people's choices. It's not their fault this mother chose to have 15 children. I am all for people voluntarily helping this mother's children but the idea other people must be HELD ACCOUNTABLE for HER CHOICES is disturbing.

But the children are more valuable than you.

They have a higher potential than you, they can become important scientists or what else, so it's in the interest of the nation to help them.

No, you value the children more than me. It's not in the interest of the nation to help them. A nation does not think, feel... It is not a sentient organism -- you are. It is in YOUR interest to help them and YOU want to steal for me to meet YOUR DESIRE: to help the children.

Somebody has to care for them to want to enslave people to have these children cared for. Otherwise, they would be left to die. The fact that it's an issue shows they will be cared for. It's only a matter of expressing that compassion morally without tyranny. In the end, if violence has to occur, it's only due to laziness from the people who send the brutes to get the children cared for.

There are an estimated 30 million real, actual, no-foolin' slaves left in the world. By claiming that a billionaire who pays 15% tax on his capital gains is in the same league with them, and spending 99% of your time complaining about his "plight" while ignoring the real slaves, you pretty much make yourself out to be a disgusting piece of shit.

Your arrangement is just about percents? So, at what point does one become a slave? 50%, 75%, 95%, 99.999999999% ? what then?

You missed the point. There are real slaves. There are people who pay income tax. Its sad to see people pretending they are slaves because they pay income tax.

A real slave has little to no say in how much of his labor he can keep. An income tax sounds the same as slavery to me: a limitation of choice by an external force.

Children cannot be held responsible for parents choice. Not their fault their parents are idiot.

People cannot be held responsible for other people's choices. It's not their fault this mother chose to have 15 children. I am all for people voluntarily helping this mother's children but the idea other people must be HELD ACCOUNTABLE for HER CHOICES is disturbing.

But the children are more valuable than you.

They have a higher potential than you, they can become important scientists or what else, so it's in the interest of the nation to help them.

No, you value the children more than me. It's not in the interest of the nation to help them. A nation does not think, feel... It is not a sentient organism -- you are. It is in YOUR interest to help them and YOU want to steal for me to meet YOUR DESIRE: to help the children.

Why is theft bad? Good luck arguing that point.

Property rights encourage the sustention of life by giving incentive for production.

Go read some Nietzsche. This is basic philosophy here, friend. There's nothing original here. There is no morality, no meaning... nothing intrinsic... Yes, we know. Truisms. We're discussing preferences. Go ahead and go nihilistic on us but it proves nothing extraordinary.

Children cannot be held responsible for parents choice. Not their fault their parents are idiot.

People cannot be held responsible for other people's choices. It's not their fault this mother chose to have 15 children. I am all for people voluntarily helping this mother's children but the idea other people must be HELD ACCOUNTABLE for HER CHOICES is disturbing.

But the children are more valuable than you.

They have a higher potential than you, they can become important scientists or what else, so it's in the interest of the nation to help them.

No, you value the children more than me. It's not in the interest of the nation to help them. A nation does not think, feel... It is not a sentient organism -- you are. It is in YOUR interest to help them and YOU want to steal for me to meet YOUR DESIRE: to help the children.

Children cannot be held responsible for parents choice. Not their fault their parents are idiot.

People cannot be held responsible for other people's choices. It's not their fault this mother chose to have 15 children. I am all for people voluntarily helping this mother's children but the idea other people must be HELD ACCOUNTABLE for HER CHOICES is disturbing.

But the children are more valuable than you.

They have a higher potential than you, they can become important scientists or what else, so it's in the interest of the nation to help them.

No, you value the children more than me. It's not in the interest of the nation to help them. A nation does not think, feel... It is not a sentient organism -- you are. It is in YOUR interest to help them and YOU want to steal for me to meet YOUR DESIRE: to help the children.

It is a fact that they have more potential than an adult person.

It doesn't matter. Only an individual can value that in the end. You do and you want to steal/hurt/kill to meet this desire of yours. I certainly don't care if a child may have more potential than me. I won't commit suicide or inhibit the ability to sustain myself or somebody else to help the child.